Worst Military Commanders Since WW2 (fixed)

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

So, the last threads were fun so I thought I'd start one about post WW2 conflicts.

Some people did make both lists.

I know there's a lot of conflicts that don't have a commander on this list. These were just the names that jumped out at me that people sometimes single out for exceptional bad performance.

My Votes: Batista, Guevara, Hussein, Clark.

Edit: I'm sort of regretting the Clark vote. He was bad, but part of that wasn't his fault but Bill Clinton's fault.

[Kubador]

Saddam was as much of a military commander as Bush...

[Kev4000]

where is Bush on the list?

[Oddball]

Arafat, what a joke he was...should of NEVER won the Nobel Peace Prize, and Saddam...just a dick...yeah, he could keep order - somewhat - but by inhumane methods.

[Captain Pyjama Shark]

Voted for Saddam, Westmoreland, MacArthur and the Israeli dude.

[Kev4000]

but comparing just late 20th century is kinda boring.
should be comparing of all time.

[VonMudra]

Chiang Kai Shek, Arafat, Hussein, Guevara

[Fuchs]

MacArthur, Guevera and Israeli.

MacArthur might have been a good leader with +10 kudos, the idea of nuking Korea is instant -1000. Just the idea of nuking Korea, angers China, angers Russia, some psycho Communist goes trigger happy, more areas infected.

Guevera, good icon, no leader. He even admitted it himself in his memoires.

[Flippy Warbear]

More fucking leader polls?? Goddamnit. Cant people just have a conversation about all these within _one_ thread?

[Jobabb Jobabbsen]

Everything have to become statistics you know     I would pick one not on the list at least, which arent a military commander. But in a potential future war maybe she have to be.  Queen Sonja of Norway has the rank of colonel cause of her royal position. With her tailoring/fashion education i guess she would score quite low.

[HadrianBT]

People, are you kidding?!

First, as has been correctly noted, Saddam was not really a military commander. But let's leave this. The Iraqi army showed complete wonders in the war with Iran, where Iran had superior weaponry in terms of numbers, not quality. They still have all the planes supplied by the US as their main air force. Iraq only had a few of the latest things at the time (five Mig25, AFAIK). And they still fought to a close draw.

Or are you talking about the Gulf War?.. That would be even more stupid. Look at Basrah - a lot of defences, pretty good positions - nearly NO fighting! Why? Because everyone surrendered, presumably bribed by the US (if US actually did that - +10 respect points to them, way to go). How is Saddam related to that? Or maybe he should take his pistol and charge himself?.. It would be like blaming Obama for the explosion, which caused the oil spill

Voted: Abdel Hakim Amer
Although, another question - was the order to retreat a stupid one or maybe he wanted to actually save some people's lives and accept the inevitable?